The Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992

Section 17. Powers of Adjudicating and other Authorities.

The Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992

Bare Act

(1) Every authority making any adjudication or hearing any appeal or exercising any powers of 1 [review] under this Act shall have all the powers of a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), while trying a suit, in respect of the following matters, namely:--

(a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of witnesses;

(b) requiring the discovery and production of any document;

(c) requisitioning any public record or copy thereof from any court or office;

(d) receiving evidence on affidavits; and

(e) issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents.

(2) Every authority making any adjudication or hearing any appeal or exercising any powers of 1 [review] under this Act shall be deemed to be a civil court for the purposes of sections 345 and 346 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974).

(3) Every authority making any adjudication or hearing any appeal or exercising any powers of 1 [review] under this Act shall have the power to make such orders of an interim nature as it may think fit and may also, for sufficient cause, order the stay of operation of any decision or order.

(4) Clerical or arithmetical mistakes in any decision or order or errors arising therein from any accidental slip or omission may at any time be corrected by the authority by which the decision or order was made, either on its own motion or on the application of any of the parties:

Provided that where any correction proposed to be made under this sub-section will have the effect of prejudicially affecting any person, no such correction shall be made except after giving to that person a reasonable opportunity of making a representation in the matter and no such correction shall be made after the expiry of two years from the date on which such decision or order was made.

Judgments on Section 17

  • Reckitt Benckiser India Private Limited vs Union Of India And Ors — Delhi High Court, 28 Mar 2026. Where the adjudicating authority possesses subject-matter jurisdiction and power under Section 13 of the FT(DR) Act, 1992, an order at most amounting to an 'erroneous exercise of jurisdiction' cannot be assailed by…
  • Tukaram Bhat vs Director General Of Foreign Trade — Delhi High Court, 22 Apr 2025. A director cannot be fastened with personal liability under Section 11(2) of the FTDR Act for a company's export-obligation default merely because he was (or was a whole-time) director; specific allegations of his duty…
  • Ajit Gulabchand vs Director General Of Foreign Trade — Delhi High Court, 22 Apr 2025. A director cannot be held personally liable for a company's non-fulfilment of export obligations under the FTDR Act unless a Section 14 notice specifically alleges the duty or obligation cast on him and his conscious…